Re: Property and life

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• [ Next ][ Previous ] In reply to: Samael

I wrote:
>Are you saying that your life is not your property?

Samael responds:
>I don't think of my life as an object. It's a feature of mine a
'property'
>in the same way as 'dark hair' is. It's just a feature I've grown very
fond
>of.

OK, let's not quibble over intangibles; how about your body then? Would you at least agree that your body is your property? If so, then doesn't your property right in your body entail a right to keep that body alive (using your own resources)?

I wrote:
>Since property includes life itself, there can be no higher good than
>protection of property.

Samael rejoins:
>Since carbon compunds include life itself, there van be no higher good
than
>the protection of carbon compunds.

Huh? In what possible sense do carbon compounds "include" life? Certain types of compounds make life as we know it possible, but saying they *include* life is as sensible as saying that the electromagnetic spectrum "includes" _Deep Space Nine_. Can't you think of a real analogy?

Dick

• [ Next ][ Previous ] In reply to: Samael